Author Topic: D&D 3.5 FAQ: Validity of Answers  (Read 33692 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

EjoThims

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1945
  • The Ferret
    • Email
Re: D&D 3.5 FAQ: Validity of Answers
« Reply #100 on: November 19, 2008, 07:38:21 AM »
Cheese is 10/10 Rainbow Servant.  6/10 Rainbow Servant isn't half as bad.

It's 10/10, and it's really only worthwhile for most classes that would actually take it if it is.

X-Codes

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 3941
Re: D&D 3.5 FAQ: Validity of Answers
« Reply #101 on: November 19, 2008, 07:59:52 AM »
Cheese is 10/10 Rainbow Servant.  6/10 Rainbow Servant isn't half as bad.

It's 10/10, and it's really only worthwhile for most classes that would actually take it if it is.
For 9th-level spells?  What Warmage and/or Dread Necro 9th-level spells are really worth the entire Cleric spell list!?  That said, the other arcane casters easily have better things to do.  There's no arguing that.

As for the 6/10 or 10/10, that needs something (FAQ/Errata/kick to the teeth of the writers) on it's own.  When the rules change according to what language you speak, there's really something horribly wrong.

Callix

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 622
  • Not cool enough for a custom title.
Re: D&D 3.5 FAQ: Validity of Answers
« Reply #102 on: November 19, 2008, 08:06:54 AM »
Cheese is 10/10 Rainbow Servant.  6/10 Rainbow Servant isn't half as bad.

It's 10/10, and it's really only worthwhile for most classes that would actually take it if it is.
For 9th-level spells?  What Warmage and/or Dread Necro 9th-level spells are really worth the entire Cleric spell list!?  That said, the other arcane casters easily have better things to do.  There's no arguing that.

As for the 6/10 or 10/10, that needs something (FAQ/Errata/kick to the teeth of the writers) on it's own.  When the rules change according to what language you speak, there's really something horribly wrong.
The rules don't change by language. Text trumps tables. The later printings simply confirm what was already the policy: the table is in error, and Rainbow Servant gives full casting progression.
I know gameology-fu.

EjoThims

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1945
  • The Ferret
    • Email
Re: D&D 3.5 FAQ: Validity of Answers
« Reply #103 on: November 19, 2008, 08:10:54 AM »
For 9th-level spells?  What Warmage and/or Dread Necro 9th-level spells are really worth the entire Cleric spell list!?

My impression has been that without 10/10, warmage is such a crappy base, that the full cleric list to 8th level doesn't really make up for it, especially compared to say, a Cleric. Dread Necro is a little tougher, but a straight Cleric will likely still fill desired roles better, and with higher level spells.

And if you're entering the class specifically for that Cleric casting, then, to me at least, the bar to judge the class by would be whether or not you can use those Cleric spells to do what you'd want to with the base class better than a Cleric could use those spells to do it.

As for the 6/10 or 10/10, that needs something (FAQ/Errata/kick to the teeth of the writers) on it's own.  When the rules change according to what language you speak, there's really something horribly wrong.

In the English version, the text itself was 10/10, yes? Besides, were there even any non-English versions where the text said itself was only 6/10?

X-Codes

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 3941
Re: D&D 3.5 FAQ: Validity of Answers
« Reply #104 on: November 19, 2008, 08:36:37 AM »
My impression has been that without 10/10, warmage is such a crappy base, that the full cleric list to 8th level doesn't really make up for it, especially compared to say, a Cleric. Dread Necro is a little tougher, but a straight Cleric will likely still fill desired roles better, and with higher level spells.

And if you're entering the class specifically for that Cleric casting, then, to me at least, the bar to judge the class by would be whether or not you can use those Cleric spells to do what you'd want to with the base class better than a Cleric could use those spells to do it.
The balance perspective works both ways, however, given that 10/10 overcompensates.  The Warmage would suddenly become a significantly better Cleric caster than the Cleric because he would have more spells per day and have no need to prepare, simply cast any spell off the Cleric list whenever.

Also, the expectation of having a Tier 4 class compare favorably to a Tier 1 class because of a PrC is pretty unrealistic, and if we just go for unlimited CO then every suggestion for a party would be 1 Druid, 1 Wizard, 1 Cleric, second Wizard, and then add Clerics until everyone has a character.  The problem is that that's boring, and there are a lot of obstinate people out there that just plain want to play Warmages.

In the English version, the text itself was 10/10, yes? Besides, were there even any non-English versions where the text said itself was only 6/10?
I've heard confirmation that at least one non-English edition of Complete Divine had it listed in both text and table as 6/10.  That said, the argument was so long ago that I've forgotten what language.  I want to say that it was the French edition.  It's probably buried somewhere in 339's archives.

EjoThims

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1945
  • The Ferret
    • Email
Re: D&D 3.5 FAQ: Validity of Answers
« Reply #105 on: November 19, 2008, 08:45:27 AM »
The balance perspective works both ways, however, given that 10/10 overcompensates.  The Warmage would suddenly become a significantly better Cleric caster than the Cleric because he would have more spells per day and have no need to prepare, simply cast any spell off the Cleric list whenever.

True, but the Cleric can still do things the Warmage can't without other trickery. And if he's jumping through hoops like that, I'd hope he actually gets more out of it.

Also, the expectation of having a Tier 4 class compare favorably to a Tier 1 class because of a PrC is pretty unrealistic

Not when the main draw of that PrC for the tier 4 class is the ability to cast spells like the tier 1 class. Because, other than being obstinate, there would be no reason to play the tier 4 class + the PrC if it didn't compare.

a lot of obstinate people out there that just plain want to play Warmages.

That does not make the Warmage (and by extension Warmage+PrC) any less a subpar option though. ;) Especially when you consider that most people will make even a Rainbow Servant Warmage into a steady blaster.

I've heard confirmation that at least one non-English edition of Complete Divine had it listed in both text and table as 6/10.

Strange, I must have missed that. I remember that whichever foreign language edition was printed immediately following the English had text and table both as 10/10. But either way, the English version has text as 10/10, which trumps the table, and it has received no errata of which I am aware. So since English is the only language I can read well enough to do DnD stuff with, that's more than enough of an answer for me. :D

archangel.arcanis

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2938
    • Email
Re: D&D 3.5 FAQ: Validity of Answers
« Reply #106 on: November 19, 2008, 01:48:44 PM »
Ok after reading through the arguments and everyone claiming what the text states i decided to make it clear:

Quote
Stone Warden (Ex): Beginning at 2nd level, a deepwarden knows how to use his strengths to compensate for his weaknesses. He adds his Constitution bonus to AC instead of his Dexterity, if the character's Constitution bonus is higher. The deepwarden loses this bonus to his Armor Class whenever he would normally be denied his Dexterity bonus to AC. In such a situation, the deepwarden would still be considered flat-footed.
Quote


these courtesy of the wizards web site.

it clearly states
1. his gets con bonus to AC and does not receive his Dex bonus to AC. if, and only if (implied), his con bonus is higher.
2. when he would be denied his dexterity bonus to AC he doesn't gain the benefits of having his con bonus to AC. It explicitly states flat-footed which is the only condition that prevents dex to AC, others such as hold person cause flat-footed and indirectly cause loss of dex to AC.

in the phb it is clearly stated a specific but contradictory rule, such as using con instead of dex to ac, trumps the general rule.

no where in there does it mention max dexterity concerning armors. As such there is no specific rule to trump the limiting of Dex to AC general rule, thus it can not be applied to Con, there is no ambiguity.

Is this what they intended? I don't know, but it is what they wrote. And honestly if you feel that it causes the deepwarden to have too high an AC just house rule it. If the difference of a few points of AC is that big of a deal in your game then the DM is in trouble, there will be far more difficult things to handle that they won't be able to deal with.


edit to change gears:

As to the Rainbow Servant.  This is reiterating the fact that text trumps tables.  It was a case of the right hand not knowing what the left hand was doing.  It is a PrC and a Base class that were from different books and interacted in a way that neither author had considered, because each changed the rules for spell knowledge slightly.  Had it been a sorcerer taking the PrC no problem he can only learn so many spells off the cleric list, a wizard is similar in that he has to find scrolls of them and would likely be better suited going into another PrC. Warmage/DreadNecro/Beguiler get much more out of this as they need expanded spell lists to stay competitive but goes overboard with knowing every cleric spell.  They are also at an advantage over the cleric in that they aren't limited in their casting of spells that have a descriptor against their alignment.

So to sum up that last paragraph the ruling is correct but the the interaction of rules is flawed and any DM should carefully consider the interaction of said base classes with that PrC.
« Last Edit: November 19, 2008, 02:01:05 PM by archangel.arcanis »
Clerics and Druids are like the 4 and 2 in 42. Together they are the answer to the ultimate question in D&D.
Retire the character before the DM smacks you with the Table as the book will feel totally inadequate now.-Hazren

AfterCrescent

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Organ Grinder
  • *
  • Posts: 4220
  • Here After
Re: D&D 3.5 FAQ: Validity of Answers
« Reply #107 on: November 19, 2008, 03:09:55 PM »
I remember the whole debate, for what it's worth... After Rainbow Servant was printed, the following languages printed it as 6/10 casting (iirc): French, Spanish, and one other.

However, the most recent printing was in Portuguese which printed it as 10/10 both ways. Funny how that works, right?  I remember there being a sage answer which stated the text trumps table rule and that it is 19/10, but that it would be too powerful and a suggested houserule is to leave it 6/10.
The cake is a lie.
Need to play table top? Get your game on at:
Brilliant Gameologists' PbP Forum. Do it, you know you want to.
The 3.5 Cleric Handbook
The 13th Guard - An alternate history campaign idea.
Clerics just wake up one morning and decide they need to kick ass, and it needs to be kicked NOW. ~veekie

BowenSilverclaw

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 5337
  • Walking that fine line between genius and insanity
    • Email
Re: D&D 3.5 FAQ: Validity of Answers
« Reply #108 on: November 19, 2008, 03:12:34 PM »
19/10? Wow, that's awesome :P
"Weakness? Come test thy mettle against me, hairless ape, and we shall know who is weak!"

Quote from: J0lt
You caught a fish.  It was awesome.   :lol

AfterCrescent

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Organ Grinder
  • *
  • Posts: 4220
  • Here After
Re: D&D 3.5 FAQ: Validity of Answers
« Reply #109 on: November 19, 2008, 03:15:08 PM »
I know, isn't it?!

I haven't played anything but Beguiler/Rainbow Servant since.
The cake is a lie.
Need to play table top? Get your game on at:
Brilliant Gameologists' PbP Forum. Do it, you know you want to.
The 3.5 Cleric Handbook
The 13th Guard - An alternate history campaign idea.
Clerics just wake up one morning and decide they need to kick ass, and it needs to be kicked NOW. ~veekie

X-Codes

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 3941
Re: D&D 3.5 FAQ: Validity of Answers
« Reply #110 on: November 20, 2008, 04:30:48 AM »
True, but the Cleric can still do things the Warmage can't without other trickery. And if he's jumping through hoops like that, I'd hope he actually gets more out of it.
While a Warmage might not be able to do as many tricks as a given Cleric build, I can't think of anything particularly useful that the Cleric can do that a given Warmage can't.

I remember the whole debate, for what it's worth... After Rainbow Servant was printed, the following languages printed it as 6/10 casting (iirc): French, Spanish, and one other.

However, the most recent printing was in Portuguese which printed it as 10/10 both ways. Funny how that works, right?  I remember there being a sage answer which stated the text trumps table rule and that it is 19/10, but that it would be too powerful and a suggested houserule is to leave it 6/10.
(funny typo left in for posterity)

Yeah, I really don't like the editions-in-different-languages argument, even if some are technically newer than others.  It doesn't seem right that D&D would change depending on your relative geography, which is why I would think WotC should release a tidbit in their errata changing some editions to match others or an FAQ entry saying to use the rules as presented in the newest edition.

Guyr Adamantine

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 586
  • Chaotic Evil and loving it.
    • Email
Re: D&D 3.5 FAQ: Validity of Answers
« Reply #111 on: November 20, 2008, 04:43:57 AM »
Yeah, I really don't like the editions-in-different-languages argument, even if some are technically newer than others.  It doesn't seem right that D&D would change depending on your relative geography, which is why I would think WotC should release a tidbit in their errata changing some editions to match others or an FAQ entry saying to use the rules as presented in the newest edition.

There's always a few errors between translations.

For example, the french version of the Book of Vile Darkness gives the Thrall of Graazt PrC a Wizard's BaB on the table until level 10, where it becomes a Fighter's BaB.

X-Codes

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 3941
Re: D&D 3.5 FAQ: Validity of Answers
« Reply #112 on: November 20, 2008, 05:04:01 AM »
Yeah, I really don't like the editions-in-different-languages argument, even if some are technically newer than others.  It doesn't seem right that D&D would change depending on your relative geography, which is why I would think WotC should release a tidbit in their errata changing some editions to match others or an FAQ entry saying to use the rules as presented in the newest edition.

There's always a few errors between translations.

For example, the french version of the Book of Vile Darkness gives the Thrall of Graazt PrC a Wizard's BaB on the table until level 10, where it becomes a Fighter's BaB.
That's not a translation error, that's a good, old-fashioned editing error.  Besides, the order of the books was 10/10, 6/10, 6/10, 6/10, 10/10.  Does WotC only know how to translate between Portugeese and English or are the two languages actually alien to them?... wait, don't answer that.

EjoThims

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1945
  • The Ferret
    • Email
Re: D&D 3.5 FAQ: Validity of Answers
« Reply #113 on: November 20, 2008, 02:39:17 PM »
While a Warmage might not be able to do as many tricks as a given Cleric build, I can't think of anything particularly useful that the Cleric can do that a given Warmage can't.

Effective BFC, SoDs, mass long term buffing, personal long term buffing, healing, Miracle, melee physical, ranged physical.

All of these things Warmages either outright suck at or have to get through convoluted means.

Now, 10/10 Rainbow Servant lets a Warmage do a lot of these effectively. But 6/10 and the loss of 9th level spells, plus having to meet the prereqs, and not having turning attempts for DMM without even more trickery (divine based PrCs that grant turning don't work until 17th level, and then wouldn't divine casting), means a Cleric 20 (much less one that PrCs intelligently) will still be vastly superior at all of the above. And again, if you have to jump through that many hoops and you're still not as good as a straight core class at something, there is a problem.

CinnamonPixie

  • Monkey bussiness
  • *
  • Posts: 5
    • Email
Re: D&D 3.5 FAQ: Validity of Answers
« Reply #114 on: December 16, 2008, 12:50:29 AM »
[quote author=EjoThims

FaQ (and Sage/Cust Serv) doesn't have the authority to do things like change the ma Dex rules to apply to all attributes. Only PHB errata has that power.

This FaQ entry solves nothing, as we already knew that the preferred RaI was to limit it.
[/quote]

More importantly, there was no ONE person or group of people acting as "the sage" for the entire run of the Q&A articles... And they had little to nothing to do (quite often) with the Customer Service answers... So you'd often get answers to the same questions that were confusing (when looking at both answers) and sometimes downright conflicting and contradicting. That's why I always looked at the FAQ as a "general guide" to help understand something - unless it seemed contrary to the book(s) and/or Errata texts, and the Errata texts and the books they pertain to as the primary authority.

Of course, if they hadn't been so hot to push so many 4e concepts and ideas into 3.5 (I mean, come on they were writing 4e for a good number of years that they were pushing 3.5 content out to us... Would it really have been that hard to keep the material separate? But then, that'd bust their "the game is the same" and their lie that "it's not all that alien or different" trash talk to pieces... By doing that, adding 4e concepts that tended to confuse, overpower, or outright "break" things in 3.5 they made a lot of concessions to make it feel more like 4e and allowed the 3.5 rules to get more and more muddled and encumbered - and this was likely intentional, and at the very least completely acceptable as they didn't give a damn anymore, they knew they were going to hose us all by conning us to buy the new material knowing full-well they were making it obsolete before it even made it to the editor's desk for approval to print and publish!)...



EjoThims

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1945
  • The Ferret
    • Email
Re: D&D 3.5 FAQ: Validity of Answers
« Reply #115 on: December 16, 2008, 05:19:53 PM »
More importantly, there was no ONE person or group of people acting as "the sage" for the entire run of the Q&A articles...

Very good point.

But other than this one line, I have no idea what the point of your post was in this thread.

Honestly; I am seriously baffled as to why it was posted here.